Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Jelly Star – The Smallest Android 13 Smartphone

unihertz.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 276 posts

Re: Jelly Star – The Smallest Android 13 Smartphone

#81

Post by keyringlight »

josephcsible wrote: post #58
mixermachine wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you use apps that require security (like payment apps) you might run into problems here. My company might need to exclude phones like this one soon because more and more CVEs are coming up. Alternative ROMs are often not the solution here because Play Integrity and Key Attestation no longer work. For general messaging and browsing this hardware likely work quite well. Btw I had the Motorola Defy and flashed it eve…

I wouldn't use the phrase "require security" to describe such apps, since to fulfill what they actually require, you often end up being less secure. For example, most such apps will be fine with you running them on a phone with 20 critical CVEs from a year ago, but not on a phone that you unlocked the bootloader of to install a version of Android that fixes said CVEs.

The challenge is trust, can you trust that an third party ROM hasn't been tampered with, and that third party maintaining the build for your device is often some guy on the internet you probably only know as a pseudonym. It might be the latest version, it might have some modifications that 'distro' of ROM applies to all their builds, some required per-device changes to make it work, but what degree of confidence is there that nothing else changed and the OS is lying to them?

The same applies to most open source efforts, but I think it's understandable for institutions with consequences to what their apps do (like handling money and bank accounts) to opt out of potentially being undermined by the OS when they have the means. There's also elements of phones being general purpose computers now vs locked down appliances, GPL3 vs tivoization, and so on.

Re: Jelly Star – The Smallest Android 13 Smartphone

#82

Post by grishka »

RachelF wrote: post #78
grishka wrote: post #70

It's a bit too small, but I like that it's a thing. However, for my own use, I want something in-between. A 4" phone would be ideal. I'm still confused how there aren't any phones for people who still use a computer as their primary means of accessing the internet . Even for this one, the media review section makes it look like it's "to distract oneself from social media". As if a phone's primary purpose isn't to be…

iPhone 4 or 12 mini size is probably ideal for me personally. While this is small, it is double the thickness of most modern phones. Still, it is great to see a bit of creativity in the smartphone market. Most phones are pretty much the same these days.

For me, iPhone 5/5S/SE is the ideal size. I even seriously considered different ways to try to port Android to the SE, but while this would've been an interesting project, I decided that I have more useful things to work on.

Re: Jelly Star – The Smallest Android 13 Smartphone

#83

Post by nextaccountic »

ncruces wrote: post #68
wkat4242 wrote: post #6

Part of the problem with this brand is that this "Android 13 Smartphone" will probably stay that forever. Updates are very very minimal. I have their first jelly and it didn't even get the upgrade they promised. Other than that, it's not so bad. Swype-typing makes a small keyboard still useful. But the updates really are the achilles heel here.

Honestly, I don't care about feature upgrades in a device like this, which, invariably, degrade experience, rather than improve it. I would much rather the industry moved to focus on security upgrades. Keep the device reasonably updated while it's on sale (either current or previous feature version max), then promise extended support for N years, where any critical security issues are patched, and that's all. I espec…

I want open source OSes, giving the possibility of hobbyist communities that upgrade on their own

current open source android roms will disable many features because they are proprietary. even roms that include proprietary code, like lineageos, will disable many features anyway because they can't make it work while updating the android version

open source should be mandatory. let the rest up to the users (if there is a strong enough community)

Re: Jelly Star – The Smallest Android 13 Smartphone

#84

Post by laurex »

I still use an iPhone SE (original 2016 version), probably the most beautiful phone ever and quite functional, though this year it finally stopped being supported by a lot of apps due to its iOS. Surprisingly, most apps work just fine until they are just removed from availability. (I'm not gaming on it or anything!) It is the perfect size and with no notifications enabled, is dang near ideal as long as you don't need great photos (but if Apple ever returned the form factor which will obviously never happen, I am sure a decent camera is viable). That said, I really can't believe we are still stuck with these devices, which are mostly anti-social and too tempting to distraction. Though Humane was laughable, some kind of thing that gives me access to information when I need it but otherwise doesn't really interrupt the flow of life would be pretty awesome.

Re: Jelly Star – The Smallest Android 13 Smartphone

#85

Post by crossroadsguy »

wkat4242 wrote: post #6

Part of the problem with this brand is that this "Android 13 Smartphone" will probably stay that forever. Updates are very very minimal. I have their first jelly and it didn't even get the upgrade they promised. Other than that, it's not so bad. Swype-typing makes a small keyboard still useful. But the updates really are the achilles heel here.

In India that is the story with Motorola phones. They have started making decent hardware, as in competing with others, but they sometimes don't even respect updates for their flagship phones. And then, they are not alone in this.

Re: Jelly Star – The Smallest Android 13 Smartphone

#86

Post by smusamashah »

This reminds of my Huawei Ideos with Android Froyo back in 2010. It's that many years. Right now I am typing this from Pixel 4a it's strangely noticeable how phones became big, powerful, and lost some buttons and audio jack.

Huawei Ideos: 104 x 54.8 x 13.5 mm (102g)

Jelly star: 95.1 x 49.6 x 18.7 mm (116g)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huawei_IDEOS

Re: Jelly Star – The Smallest Android 13 Smartphone

#87

Post by SamBam »

MBCook wrote: post #33

I would think this would be difficult to use for most apps. It’s not 2009 anymore. App developers just assume a certain minimum screen size. While layouts are flexible they often just don’t work on smaller screens.

Maybe many people don't need "most apps."

I need about 5 apps and a nice camera.

Re: Jelly Star – The Smallest Android 13 Smartphone

#88

Post by chx »

nunobrito wrote: post #22
pwildani wrote: post #11

I've been using one of these for about a year. It's been great having a device that I can actually reach all of, and the small size also helps to not be a distraction. About the only thing I miss from the Pixel series is camera skills and unnatural photo enhancements. It takes some nudging to get my jelly star to focus properly.

Try their Tank Mini. Double the pixels, double the battery and still tiny enough: https://www.unihertz.com/products/tank-mini We have it here in the house, it is a really good phone too.

How is durability? I use a Pixel 4 in https://ghostek.com/products/atomic-slim-pixel-4-series which is very nice because the bumper frame rises above the screen so when you drop it the screen doesn't break. Yet, it's not obnoxiously huge. I love this setup -- except for the Pixel 4 abysmal battery life.

Re: Jelly Star – The Smallest Android 13 Smartphone

#89

Post by montroser »

BenjiWiebe wrote: post #40
mainframed wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an owner of a Samsung Galaxy S22, which is not small but seemed to me like the only sane size - feature - price balance on the Android market back then: maybe the reason is battery life? I'm really underwhelmed by the one of the S22. I barely get a day out of it. When I'm travelling with Google Maps, I have to carry a power bank. Maybe current android phones are just optimized so bad in comparison to iPhones? And…

Surely with modern processor efficiency, they could get similar or better battery life as small phones of the 2010s? Thinking lovingly of the form factor of the 2013 Moto X.

Yes! That first generation Moto X was the premature peak of the small Android phone. After that everything just got bigger and increasingly less beautiful.

Re: Jelly Star – The Smallest Android 13 Smartphone

#90

Post by crossroadsguy »

My first iPhone (original SE) was a choice 95% because of its size and 5% out of curiosity for iOS. At that time (2016-17) when Androids had already started ballooning up. 12 Mini's new battery was insufficient and that is why I had decided to move to iPhone 14 and not just replace that battery as that would have not been good enough either. Original SE was my favourite, second was mini.

If there is going to be a "private" enough Android (even if that is a bigger phone) with stricter Play Store and clamping down on rampant permission devouring by apps, I will stop buying iPhones. Because if I have to anyway buy jumbo phones I'd rather buy cheaper Androids. Had hopes from Nothing phone in privacy but they are into just gimmicks like funny lights on the back and all.

But I don't think Google will do it or let it happen.

Post reply on HN